| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CoA_30/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal dismissed REEL GmbH's preliminary objection to the jurisdiction of the UPC in a damages determination action brought by Fives ECL, SAS (UPC_CFI_274/2023). The CoA held that the UPC has jurisdiction under Art. 32(1)(a) and 32(1)(f) UPCA to determine damages following a national court judgment establishing infringement of EP 1 740 740. The separate action for damages is not limited to 'applications' under the Rules but constitutes an autonomous action; the court's competence also covers acts of infringement committed before the UPCA entry into force, provided the patent had not lapsed by 1 June 2023. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CoA_30/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (in German) set aside the Hamburg Local Division's order dismissing Fives ECL's standalone damages action and referred the case back to the Hamburg Local Division. The Court of Appeal held that the UPC has jurisdiction over a standalone action for assessment of damages where a national court has already found infringement and established the defendant's liability in principle, even for acts that pre-date the entry into force of the UPCA on 1 June 2023, provided the patent was still in force on that date. The Court confirmed that such actions fall within Art. 32(1) UPCA. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CFI_627/2024 | Munich LD | Generic application | — | Dismissed | President of the UPC Court of First Instance dismissed NVIDIA's application to change the language of proceedings from German to English under Art. 49(5) UPCA and R.323 RoP. The President found that NVIDIA had not demonstrated significant impairment in organising its defence due to the German language chosen by the claimants, who are domiciled in German-speaking countries. |
| 2025-01-16 | UPC_CFI_33/2024 | Vienna LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Vienna Local Division found that Strabag Infrastructure & Safety Solutions GmbH infringed SWARCO FUTURIT's European Patent EP 2 643 717. The Court granted an injunction, recall of infringing products from distribution channels, provision of information and destruction of infringing products. Damages were referred to a separate assessment procedure. A validity defence was not considered as no counterclaim for revocation was filed. SWARCO's request to publish the judgment was rejected; Strabag and the intervener were ordered to bear costs. |
| 2025-01-15 | UPC_CFI_402/2023 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Infringement action, related patent amendment application, and counterclaims for revocation all withdrawn by mutual agreement pursuant to Rule 265 RoP. Each party bears its own costs. No costs order between parties. |
| 2025-01-14 | APL_59329/2024 | Court of Appeal | Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3) | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal revoked the Mannheim Local Division's order on security for costs issued solely by the judge-rapporteur, finding that the judge-rapporteur was not competent to grant leave to appeal against such an order; the matter was referred back to the Court of First Instance for panel review. |
| 2025-01-14 | ACT_2379/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Infringed | Final decision in infringement action (with counterclaim for revocation) concerning an avalanche transceiver patent. The Düsseldorf Local Division found direct and indirect infringement by the Mammut defendants, granted an injunction, ordered recall and removal from distribution channels, ordered provision of accounts, and declared liability for damages (with EUR 3,000 preliminary damages awarded). The counterclaim for revocation was dismissed. Costs were split: claimant to bear 80%, each defendant 10% of infringement action costs; defendants to bear costs of revocation counterclaim. |
| 2025-01-14 | UPC_CFI_145/2024 | Munich LD | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | Procedural order from Munich Local Division dated 14 January 2025 regarding R. 262A RoP confidentiality applications filed by defendants (Accord Healthcare, Stada, Dr. Reddy's, Zentiva) in Sanofi's infringement actions concerning EP 2 493 466. The order defines which representative and company personnel on each defendant's side are permitted access to unredacted versions of confidential documents produced in the proceedings. |
| 2025-01-14 | CC_17292/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Counterclaim for revocation | Revocation merits | Permanent injunction | The Düsseldorf Local Division found that Mammut Sports Group AG and GmbH infringed EP 3 466 498 B1 (owned by Ortovox Sportartikel GmbH, relating to a transceiver device for avalanche rescue) and dismissed the counterclaim for revocation, maintaining the patent. The Court granted an injunction, ordered product recall and removal from distribution channels, ordered disclosure of information and accounting, and awarded EUR 3,000 in provisional damages. Indirect infringement was found because Mammut induced end-users to activate the infringing feature. The Court rejected the request for publication of the decision as Ortovox's interests were sufficiently protected by the injunction. 80% of infringement action costs borne by claimant (Ortovox) and 10% each by defendants; counterclaim costs borne equally by defendants. |
| 2025-01-13 | UPC_CFI_298/2023 | Munich LD | Application Rop 333 | — | Procedural only | Munich Local Division issued a revised order modifying a previous case management order (of 14 October 2024) to require claimant Harvard College to submit its auxiliary requests (in the application to amend the patent) within 20 days after the decision of the EPO Opposition Division, rather than at a fixed date, in light of a pending EPO opposition with oral proceedings scheduled. |
| 2025-01-10 | APL_54646/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal addressed whether the appeal had become devoid of purpose following the conclusion of related provisional measure proceedings before the Local Division Milan. The appeal was declared moot as the main proceedings at first instance had ended. |
| 2025-01-10 | ACT_578697/2023 | Paris LD | Generic application | Costs | Costs only | Paris Local Division issued a costs decision in Hewlett-Packard Development Company LP v LAMA FRANCE (UPC_CFI_358/2023, infringement action concerning EP 2 089 230 and EP 1 737 669). Applying the prior decision of 13 November 2024 (50/50 cost split), the court rejected both parties' requests to raise the 50% ceiling on recoverable representation costs. Each party owes the other EUR 112,000 in representation costs and EUR 7,500 in court fees, resulting in a wash. No ceiling uplift was justified despite the complexity of the double-patent case. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_CFI_459/2024 | Dusseldorf LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Decision permitting withdrawal of Valeo Electrification's infringement action against Magna PT entities (EP 3 320 602 B1) and withdrawal of Magna's counterclaim for revocation. Both parties agreed no cost applications would be made. Defendants reserved the right to apply for partial reimbursement of court fees. |
| 2025-01-10 | UPC_CFI_168/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 265 | — | Withdrawn | Infringement action and counterclaim for revocation (including patent amendment applications) were both withdrawn by mutual agreement of the parties pursuant to Rule 265 RoP. Both parties bear their own costs. 40% of court fees refunded to each party. Oral hearing dates cancelled. |
| 2025-01-09 | APL_46747/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal dismissed Abbott Diabetes Care's appeal against a first-instance order on public access to the register (R. 262.1(b) RoP), confirming that a member of the public generally has an interest in accessing written pleadings and evidence after a decision concluding first-instance proceedings has been rendered, even if an appeal is pending. The court clarified the requirements for a 'reasoned request' for access and the balancing of interests under Art. 45 UPCA. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CoA_611/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application For Costs | Costs | Costs only | Order of the Court of Appeal (Panel 2) granting DISH Technologies and Sling TV's application for reimbursement of court fees following their withdrawal of an appeal against a security-for-costs order (EUR 800,000) issued by the Mannheim Local Division. The parties had been misled by an erroneous legal remedy instruction in the first-instance order, which led them to file both a panel review request and a precautionary appeal. The Court of Appeal granted full reimbursement of the appeal fee (EUR 1,500) since the appeal was filed only as a precaution due to the incorrect instruction and was subsequently withdrawn promptly. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CFI_583/2024 | Paris LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Order by the President of the Court of First Instance granting XPENG et al.'s application to change the language of proceedings from German to English (the language in which the patent was granted) pursuant to Rule 323 RoP. ArcelorMittal required to provide English translations of the Statement of Claim at its own expense within 30 days. |
| 2025-01-09 | UPC_CFI_412/2023 | Paris CD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | The Paris Central Division (Seat) ruled on an application by ITCiCo Spain S.L. to set aside a default decision (R. 356 RoP) issued on 16 September 2024 against it in the revocation action of Bayerische Motoren Werke AG concerning EP 2 796 333. The court interpreted R. 356(2) RoP to require that the applicant demonstrate inability to comply due to reasons beyond its control (unforeseeable circumstances or force majeure). The application was considered on its merits. |
| 2025-01-08 | UPC_CFI_189/2024 | Paris CD | Generic application | Procedural | Costs only | Order from the Paris Central Division dated 8 January 2025 on Meril entities' application for costs (App_56782/2024) seeking reimbursement of EUR 15,000 from respondents (SWAT Medical AB and others) incurred in defending a rejected public-access-to-register application. The order clarifies that a 'decision on the merits' under R. 150 RoP means a decision concluding litigation proceedings with res judicata effect; proceedings on a public access application are not 'litigation' in that sense. The court dismissed the costs application on the basis that a public access proceeding does not produce a 'decision on the merits' that triggers the costs provisions. |
| 2024-12-30 | UPC_CFI_168/2024 | Munich LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Munich Local Division issued a procedural order requesting the President of the Court of First Instance to reassign a new technically qualified judge to the panel, following the resignation of the previously assigned technically qualified judge Patrice Vidon. |
| 2024-12-26 | UPC_CFI_338/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Revocation merits | Patent amended | The Paris Central Division dismissed Advanced Bionics' revocation actions (main and counterclaims) against MED-EL's EP 4 074 373 B1 (MRI-safe disk magnet for cochlear implants), maintaining the patent in the amended version of Auxiliary Request 0a after overcoming added-matter objections; costs were allocated 70% to the claimants and 30% to the defendant. |
| 2024-12-23 | APL_67135/2024 | Court of Appeal | Request for a discretionary review (RoP 220.3) | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (standing judge) dismissed Microsoft Corporation's request for discretionary review (R. 220.3 RoP) of the Paris Central Division order granting Suinno leave to reduce its damages claim under R. 263 RoP (UPC_CFI_164/2024). The Court held that an unconditional application to reduce the amount of damages claimed constitutes a proper application under R. 263.3 RoP, and that the value of the action and fee determination is the responsibility of the judge-rapporteur during the interim procedure. |
| 2024-12-23 | UPC_CoA_826/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application RoP262A | — | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal granted Microsoft's application for confidentiality protection (Rule 262A RoP) of Exhibit BP 01 (a confidential global licence and settlement offer from Suinno) filed in a discretionary review application. The exhibit was ordered not to be made available to the public. |
| 2024-12-20 | APL_40470/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI denied | The Court of Appeal dismissed Alexion's appeal against the Hamburg Local Division's refusal to grant provisional measures against Samsung Bioepis regarding patent EP 3167888. The Court addressed the interpretation of patent claims containing linguistic errors and the relevance of prosecution history. |
| 2024-12-20 | ACT_597277/2023 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a procedural order following the interim conference in the Edwards Lifesciences v. Meril infringement action, setting out preparation requirements for the oral hearing and granting leave to change the claim to include Romania following its accession to the Unitary Patent system. |
| 2024-12-20 | UPC_CFI_541/2024 | Mannheim LD | Generic Order | — | PI granted | Order from the Mannheim Local Division dated 20 December 2024 granting provisional measures requested by G. Pohl-Boskamp GmbH & C. KG against pharma-aktiva GmbH, ALDI SÜD, ALDI Nord, ALDI SE, and Hofer KG (Austria) for alleged infringement of EP 1 993 363 B1 (a composition for combating ectoparasites). The provisional measures order prohibits defendants from manufacturing, offering, distributing, using, importing or stocking the infringing products in Germany (defendants 1–4) and Austria (defendants 1 and 5). A penalty of EUR 100 per item non-compliance was imposed. The respondents were also ordered to surrender products in their possession. Defendants were ordered to pay a preliminary cost reimbursement of EUR 11,000 jointly. The measures are effective immediately and will lapse if Syngenta does not commence main proceedings within 31 calendar days / 20 working days from 20 December 2024. |
| 2024-12-20 | UPC_CoA_405/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | — | PI denied | The Court of Appeal dismissed Alexion's appeal against the first-instance refusal of provisional measures, upholding the finding that the patent claim could not be corrected by interpretation to remove alleged errors, and confirming that claim 2 of EP 3 167 888 was more likely than not insufficiently disclosed (Article 83 EPC). The provisional measures application was therefore denied. |
| 2024-12-19 | UPC_CoA_523/2024 | Court of Appeal | Procedural Order | Procedural | Procedural only | The Court of Appeal (Second Panel) ruled on admission of new evidence in the appeal by Sumi Agro against the Munich Local Division's provisional measures order in favour of Syngenta concerning EP 2 152 073. Exhibit SA17 (new pages from a publication already partly submitted at first instance) was disregarded as Sumi Agro failed to justify why these additional pages could not have been submitted earlier. Syngenta's Exhibits FF28-29 were also disregarded. However, Syngenta's Exhibits FF24-27 (concerning a possibly changed version of the contested Kagura product) were admitted, as they related to new evidence about a product modification. |
| 2024-12-18 | ACT_589997/2023 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Revocation merits | Patent maintained | The Paris Central Division dismissed Tandem Diabetes Care's revocation action against Roche's EP 2 196 231 B1 (ambulatory drug infusion system), maintaining the patent as granted and ordering the claimants to bear the costs of proceedings, finding the grounds for invalidity (including lack of inventive step over prior art Diaz/Robertson/Glejboel) were not proven. |
| 2024-12-18 | ACT_459771/2023 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Permanent injunction | The Munich Local Division issued a landmark 161-page judgment in Huawei v Netgear finding infringement of Huawei's SEP portfolio patents and granting injunction, recall and destruction orders against Netgear entities across Belgium, Germany, Italy, Finland, France and Sweden, alongside a declaration of liability for damages; counterclaims for revocation were partially successful but did not defeat infringement for all claims. |
| 2024-12-18 | ACT_459771/2023 | Munich LD | Infringement Action | Infringement merits | Permanent injunction | The Munich Local Division issued a landmark 161-page judgment in Huawei v Netgear finding infringement of Huawei's SEP portfolio patents and granting injunction, recall and destruction orders against Netgear entities across Belgium, Germany, Italy, Finland, France and Sweden, alongside a declaration of liability for damages; counterclaims for revocation were partially successful but did not defeat infringement for all claims. |
| 2024-12-18 | UPC_APP_58871/2024 | Hamburg LD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | Procedural order of the Hamburg Local Division rejecting a preliminary objection (Rule 19 RoP) filed by defendants Easee B.V., Yves Prevoo (director), and Easee Holding B.V. against Visibly Inc.'s patent infringement action. The court rejected the jurisdictional challenge, holding: (1) an alleged patent infringement constitutes a tort under Art. 7(2) Brussels I recast Regulation, giving the UPC jurisdiction over director liability claims as well; (2) the question whether a director can be held personally liable is a matter of the merits, not of jurisdiction. The court confirmed the Hamburg Local Division's competence under Art. 33(1)(a) UPCA based on the place where the alleged infringement may occur (Germany). Leave to appeal was granted. |
| 2024-12-18 | UPC_CFI_390/2023 | Munich LD | Generic application | — | Costs only | Order imposing penalty payments of EUR 46,000 against Belkin companies for non-compliance with the court's disclosure order (accounting for infringement) in Philips v Belkin. The penalty ran at EUR 500/day for 26 days. Remaining requests by Philips were rejected. Philips bears 25% of costs; Belkin bears 75%. |
| 2024-12-17 | ACT_549550/2023 | Milan LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Milan Local Division issued a pre-trial conference order in Oerlikon v Himson's infringement and revocation proceedings for EP 2 145 848 B1, addressing pending issues including infringement evidence, damages, the Rule 119 penalty request, and setting the case value at EUR 2,000,000 for cost ceiling purposes. |
| 2024-12-17 | UPC_CoA_810/2024 | Court of Appeal | Application Rop 223 | — | Dismissed | The Court of Appeal (standing judge) dismissed Curio Bioscience Inc.'s application for suspensive effect (R. 223.4 RoP) of a Düsseldorf Local Division order requiring Curio to provide security for costs of EUR 200,000 in favour of claimant 10x Genomics Inc. The standing judge held that Curio had not established 'extreme urgency' as required under R. 223 RoP, which is a condition for a standing-judge decision without hearing the respondent. |
| 2024-12-17 | UPC_CFI_240/2023 | Milan LD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order (interim conference summary) of Milan Local Division in Oerlikon Textile v Himson Engineering (EP 2 145 848). The order summarises the procedural history (evidence preservation order, infringement and revocation counterclaim), the issues discussed at the interim conference (settlement proposals, claim construction, auxiliary requests) and confirms procedural arrangements for the oral hearing. Seven auxiliary requests remain before the court. |
| 2024-12-11 | ACT_65376/2024 | Munich LD | Application for provisional measures | Preliminary injunction | PI granted | The Munich Local Division granted Huawei an anti-suit/anti-enforcement injunction ordering Netgear to withdraw its anti-enforcement injunction application before a US court (C.D. Cal.) that sought to prevent Huawei from enforcing its SEP patents (EP 3 611 989 and EP 3 678 321) before the UPC, holding that such foreign proceedings violate the EU Charter right to access to justice. |
| 2024-12-11 | UPC_CoA_719/2024 | Court of Appeal | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Court of Appeal order on Magna's application for suspensive effect of the preliminary injunction (UPC_CFI_347/2024) issued by the Düsseldorf Local Division. Magna argued the BMW 2 Series Gran Coupé (model F74) was omitted from the list of exempted models. The Court of Appeal denied suspensive effect, finding no obvious error in the CFI's rectification dismissal as Magna had not clearly introduced model F74/Gran Coupé as a distinct model during the injunction proceedings. |
| 2024-12-11 | UPC_CFI_664/2024 | Hamburg LD | Generic Order | — | Procedural only | Procedural order of Hamburg Local Division in Hand Held Products v Scandit AG (EP 3 764 271) clarifying the correct service date of the statement of claim on the defendant (a Swiss company). The court held that R. 271.6 RoP (10-day fiction for registered post) does not apply to service in Switzerland under the Hague Service Convention, and that the actual service date of 20 November 2024 applies. |
| 2024-12-10 | ACT_582093/2023 | Nordic-Baltic RD | Infringement Action | Procedural | Procedural only | The Nordic-Baltic Regional Division issued a post-interim conference procedural order in Edwards Lifesciences Corporation v Meril Life Sciences and others (UPC_CFI_380/2023, EP 3 769 722 — a transcatheter heart valve patent). The order resolved multiple procedural disputes including: admissibility of additional invalidity attacks raised in the counterclaim for revocation; how to deal with the public interest defence; request for a CJEU preliminary reference (deferred); request for a Court expert (rejected); and practical arrangements for the oral hearing. |
| 2024-12-10 | UPC_CoA_470/2023 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | — | outcomeName.other | Order of the Court of Appeal dated 10 December 2024 setting aside the CFI order imposing penalty payments (Zwangsgelder) on NanoString for alleged violations of a preliminary injunction that had been previously revoked by the CoA. The CoA held that the revocation of a preliminary injunction under Art. 75(1) UPCA and R. 242.1 RoP is retroactive — the revoked order is treated as having never had legal effect. Consequently, any subsequent order imposing penalties based on the revoked injunction also lacks legal basis, even if it concerns alleged violations before the revocation. The CFI penalty order was set aside, 10x Genomics' applications were dismissed, 10x was ordered to bear all costs, and NanoString's payment made in compliance with the penalty order was to be reimbursed. |
| 2024-12-10 | UPC_CoA_470/2023 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | — | outcomeName.other | The Court of Appeal revoked the Munich Local Division's order imposing penalty payments on NanoString for breach of a provisional injunction regarding EP 4 108 782, and rejected 10x's requests. The Court held that the Court of Appeal's earlier revocation (26 February 2024) of the provisional injunction order of 19 September 2023 had retroactive effect, meaning that the order was void ab initio and therefore could not serve as a valid legal basis for any penalty order, even for alleged breaches prior to the revocation. 10x was ordered to bear the costs of both instances and to reimburse the amount paid by NanoString. |
| 2024-12-09 | UPC_CFI_755/2024 | Munich LD | Application for provisional measures | Procedural | Procedural only | The Munich Local Division issued a rectification order (R. 353 RoP) correcting a factual error in the anti-suit/anti-enforcement injunction order of 9 December 2024 against Realtek Semiconductor, clarifying language about the prior license agreement between Avago's predecessor and Realtek. |
| 2024-12-03 | UPC_APP_56246/2024 | Milan CD | Preliminary objection | motionName.jurisdictional | Dismissed | The Milan Central Division rejected GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals S.A.'s preliminary objection (R. 19 RoP) in the revocation action UPC_CFI_476/2024 (EP 4 183 412 — a vaccine-related patent owned by GSK). GSK argued that a parallel infringement action by Pfizer before the Düsseldorf Local Division challenged the Central Division's competence over the revocation action. The Court held that the infringement action appeared inadmissible when lodged (filed on 5 August 2024, before the patent was granted on 14 August 2024) and therefore could not challenge the Central Division's competence over the revocation action under Art. 33 UPCA. The request for a hearing before deciding the preliminary objection was also rejected. |
| 2024-12-03 | APL_32012/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | motionName.appeal_decision | PI denied | Court of Appeal lifted the preliminary injunction granted by Munich Local Division against SharkNinja for alleged infringement of Dyson's EP 2 043 492 (hand-held vacuum cleaner). The Court found on the balance of probabilities it was not more likely than not that the patent was infringed, noting that the principal mode of separation in the SharkNinja product is a filter, not cyclonic separation as claimed. Dyson ordered to bear SharkNinja's costs for both instances. |
| 2024-12-03 | UPC_CoA_297/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.1 | — | PI denied | The Court of Appeal set aside the first-instance preliminary injunction granted against SharkNinja, holding that on a balance of probabilities it was not more likely than not that SharkNinja's product infringed claim 1 of Dyson's patent (EP not specified in excerpt). Dyson was ordered to bear SharkNinja's costs in both instances. |
| 2024-12-02 | UPC_CFI_114/2024 | Munich LD | Application Rop 333 | Procedural | Procedural only | Procedural order (in German) addressing multiple applications in the infringement action by Heraeus Electronics against Vibrantz GmbH (EP 3 215 288, metal sintering preparation). The panel reviewed: (1) rejection of amendment to include indirect infringement of process claim; (2) amendment to include Romania; (3) Vibrantz's application to expand invalidity counterclaim to Romania; (4) replacement of counter-defendant in revocation counterclaim; and (5) various other claimant applications. |
| 2024-11-29 | UPC_CFI_307/2024 | Paris CD | Revocation Action | Revocation merits | Patent maintained | The Paris Central Division dismissed NJOY Netherlands B.V.'s revocation action against EP 2 875 740 B1 (a patent owned by VMR Products LLC relating to electronic vapour products/e-cigarettes with a magnetic cartomizer retention mechanism). The Court found the patent novel and inventive over the asserted prior art combinations (Cross + DiFonzo, Pan + DiFonzo, and common general knowledge). The patent is maintained as granted. NJOY as the unsuccessful party bears the costs up to a ceiling of EUR 500,001. |
| 2024-11-29 | UPC_CoA_548/2024 | Court of Appeal | Appeal RoP220.2 | motionName.appeal_decision | Procedural only | Court of Appeal upheld the Düsseldorf Local Division's order requiring SodaStream Industries Ltd. (claimant/respondent) to provide security for costs in patent infringement proceedings (EP 1 793 917) against Aarke AB. The CoA affirmed the legal standard for security for costs: only the claimant's own financial position is relevant (not that of its group); a claimant's willingness to pay costs and the likely outcome of the case are irrelevant; enforcement being unduly burdensome suffices (need not be proven impossible). The appeal by Aarke was partly upheld in that the CFI applied criteria not in conformity with this standard, but the outcome (ordering SodaStream to provide security) was correct since SodaStream has sufficient financial means. |
| 2024-11-29 | UPC_CFI_355/2023 | Dusseldorf LD | Generic application | — | Procedural only | Procedural order rejecting and disregarding Defendants' (Kodak entities) further written submissions filed on 28 November 2024 because no reasoned request was made and no leave was granted by the judge-rapporteur for further submissions pursuant to Rule 36 RoP. |